Moral vs. Moralistic

I though social justice was cool back when it wasn’t.  

A few years ago before “Walk The Line” came out it wasn’t cool to listen to Johnny Cash.  I remember being in the car and playing the Greatest Hits album for some teenagers in my youth group and being ridiculed.  Today, post movie, I’ve got middle school students who have all the lyrics to “I’ve Been Everywhere” memorized.  Suddenly Johnny Cash has become cool and there’s a rush to claim first dibs. 

I’ve noticed the same thing with the current interest in social justice.  I remember back in college (1998-2002) when by God’s grace, I grew a social conscience through hearing some stories, reading some books and listening to Tim Keller.  I changed my major to social work, got a job at a homeless agency and started an after school program with some other social work majors.  I remember our big concern, the thing we worked for hours planning events and advocating for was this: convincing Christians that God cares about oppressed and poor people   We planned hunger banquets, jazz concerts, prayer fasts, chapel services, and sock collections for the homeless.  I wrote essays and posted them on bulletin boards around campus.  Our smallish band of social worker majors got criticism for this.  Here were the basic criticisms. 

1.  Working for social justice distracts from the real ministry of evangelism. 

2.  Poor people are poor mostly because of laziness or drug addiction. 

3.  Rich people are rich because they work harder than poor people.  Shouldn’t we just tell people to work harder for a living. 

4.  Social justice is a liberal issue and therefore not the concern of “evangelicals”. 

Contrast this with today.  Since I was in college we’ve had movies like Hotel Rwanda and Crash come out.  We’ve had Bono and the One Campaign.  Rob Bell and Donald Miller have become hugely popular.  Shane Claiborne, the leader of a small commune in Philadelphia called the Simple Way, has been on the cover of Christianity Today and spoken at Catalyst Conferences.  Gary Haugan and IJM have gained notoriety.  Suddenly social justice is okay for mainstream Christians to care about.  All this is what I hoped and prayed would happen back in college.  Or is it?  

One of the things I learned from Tim Keller is that the heart is an idol factory.  Our self-righteousness and self-justification is always trying to find a way to get out.  I know very well how I myself feel self-righteous about these very issues.  After all I started this post by pointing out I liked it before it was cool.  But the situation with social justice (and the environment) is more dire.  Social justice hasn’t just become popular, it’s become a fashion accessory.  Suddenly it’s hip to be about the poor.  A lot of this current movement is moralistic, not moral.  We enjoy (because of our self-righteousness) criticizing unjust companies and government policies.  

The question is what have we ourselves done besides moralistic preaching and buying a product (red) shirt?  What percentage of our churches finances and energy actually goes to deed ministry?  Has any of us sacrificed our Tivo, our wardrobe, our computer, our car, our home to give more?  Have we taken pains to buy fair trade products?  Has their been a mass migration of Christians back to cities?  Are our churches more racially integrated?  Have we given a cup of cold water in Jesus name?  For me the answer isn’t a simple yes or no.  It’s sort of. 

I know as a pastor how often being angrily against something gets substituted for being passionately for something.  What I’ve learned about that kind of thing is that its short lived and has little impact.  If the current fashion of social justice only amounts to us buying a lot of white bracelets, serving at a soup kitchen once a month and digging a well in Africa then the work isn’t over.  

6 Responses to “Moral vs. Moralistic”

  1. Doug Says:

    “Social justice hasn’t just become popular, it’s become a fashion accessory.”

    I like that point.

    Good post.

    Everything else I have in my head to say isn’t worth it right now. Besides, I’ve only done about one day’s worth of helping the poor directly, so I’m only speaking out of theory and idea.

  2. amybaker Says:

    While I love the new interest in social justice, it (self-righteously on my part) bothers me when I hear guys like Claiborne & other more emergent people talk about it as though they are pioneers who are doing something that has never been done. There are so many amazing retired social workers and pastors who have been serving people their entire lives, against incredible church pressure. Whenever I get annoyed at the ignorant comments I hear about the poor from church folks, I am consistently humbled to think about how much more controversy the previous generation faced in their churches.

  3. Michael Says:

    “Social justice is a liberal issue and therefore not the concern of “evangelicals”.”

    For so long we have thrown the baby out with the bath water. But that is not new. The church has been reactionary for hundreds of years. We should not be afraid to be labeled “liberal” or “conservative” or “fundamental” or “evangelical” if we are doing what Christ called us to do. Yet at the same time, we should know well what we believe so that when someone “labels” us, we can lovingly ask them about their definitions and make sure they understand ours. Being afraid of labels has kept the church from functioning as it should.

  4. amybaker Says:

    Michael: that is very dead on… and what I was trying to get at with the Hillary/sandwich post. We seem to spend a lot of time defining what we are not, at the expense of fighting for what the Bible tells us to fight for. We are then left with a list of things you cannot do or be, and no sense of personal holiness borne out of a relationship with God. It’s not who I am in Christ, it who I am not denominationally or politically.
    I am not a church historian, but from what I do understand, (someone correct me if they have better info) we have grown more reactionary in the 20th & 21st century as a response to “liberal secularism” and fighting to keep fundamentalism at the center. I always find it comical that while the civil rights movement was going on, white evangelicals were bickering over the validity of the KJV translation. Talk about a missed opportunity to fight for what God calls to.

  5. av Says:

    We still need to organize some small group awesomeness around this stuff. We’re all on board, just haven’t gotten around to actually *doing* it.

    We should bring it up again this thursday. Although I may not be there. We’ll see.

  6. Doug Says:

    Michael said: “We should not be afraid to be labeled “liberal” or “conservative” or “fundamental” or “evangelical” if we are doing what Christ called us to do. Yet at the same time, we should know well what we believe so that when someone “labels” us, we can lovingly ask them about their definitions and make sure they understand ours. Being afraid of labels has kept the church from functioning as it should.”

    I agree. Labels are helpful but not final. I recently wrote a blog post about this (www.liveloud.net). I think it’s important, also, to distinguish between associations we ignore for the sake of unity and progress and associations that are rightfully avoidable. If the label is meant to make you “look bad,” (Oh, you’re a liberal!” ;) then of course we ignore it and move on (if dialogue is impossible). But if the label is based on a philosophical criticism rooted in a prophetic warning against unequally yoking ourselves, then we should take that feedback seriously.

Leave a Reply